39 Comments

There are legal and ethical reasons why VAERS data is important and cannot, and should not, be dismissed: (1) it is the declared and legally required pharmacovigilance of the US government. This is supposed to be a part of a comprehensive legal schema passed by Congress that takes away the individual right to sue over vaccine harms and in return created VAERS specifically to detect safety signals in the population. (2) Healthcare providers are required by law (by the FDC&A and the FDA regulations in the CFR) to report AEs to VAERS. (3) Government officials should be legally estopped from arguing that VAERS isn't reliable. You don't get to pass a law that requires a pharmacovigilance system for safety and then claim that system is unreliable when it starts to look really bad. (4) Particularly not where for decades we've used VAERS, and the government has used it to claim how safe other vaccines are because of their low reporting for LITERALLY EVERY OTHER VACCINE in the country. This is as dishonest and unethical as it's possible to be.

Expand full comment

I would be interested in any stored recoding or look-up tables that you may have created to group similarly named symptoms. Are those available?

Expand full comment

Craig Praadekooper's howbadismybatch.com has been fun to access since my lacunar infact a little over six months ago (my VAERS EN6204 batch is up to 107 deaths from 79 a few months ago) but this VAERS 2.O material could make awareness of the vaxx atrocity go nuclear. Thanks!

Expand full comment

I can only offer antidotes, but I sit in a triage room of an A&E department most working days. Initially, I saw an increase in DVT's after the AZ vaccine. With the mRNA's, after the third so called booster shot, I saw increased presentations in men aged 35 to 50 of new onset type 1 diabetes, lymphomas and myelomas. Another notable more frequent presentation has been unexplained collapses that don't sound syncopal in nature. After the bivalent injection I saw several presentations of people in VT (conscious not pulseless). The previous 20 years I had only seen this twice. Overall, the increase in stroke, MI and AF is pretty much par for the course that is already well documented.

Expand full comment

This is excellent work. Despite the high likelihood that neither my friends nor my foes will not get anything from it, I plan to post your summary in a Twitter thread. As the trite saying goes, "Nothing Beats A Failure But A Try" or something like that.

Expand full comment

Wow this is excellent, thank you.

We are digging into DAEN (Australian VAERS) here but the data is much poorer - sloppy, incomplete, difficult to extract. Your work on VAERS fills some gaps and will make our work down here a bit easier. Much appreciated.

Expand full comment

"An intention to prevent disease is significantly stronger and less tolerant to failure than one that will only produce immunity, which in turn was stronger than the latest that will only produce protection."

Perhaps there is an interesting story if the word "immunity" was chosen as an unremarkable half-step towards the word "protection", as long ago as 2015 with several years of pandemic planning already on the shelf?

"Protection" itself is now seen to be only measuring immunogenicity as a correlate of protection before rolling out the shot and taking data that won't be shared. To protect some people at the expense of other people I guess.

Expand full comment

Scott great work! One small comment, the symptoms can be infinite. The way you wrote it is unclear. Yes there are 5 columns but they can produce any number of rows. It’s a 1:x relationship.

Expand full comment

Do you have any comment about the purge of data from VAERS that CDC did on November 18 2022? Documented by Jessica Rose

https://jessicar.substack.com/p/the-lost-myocarditis-death-neuropathy

Expand full comment

Solid!

on page 14 of 20 pages displayed in pdf form (page 13 of the actual report), there is this "As shown in Table 4, the SYMPTOM_TEXT narrative field of almost half of the

1012 reviewed VAERS reports identified a breakthrough infection after vaccination, through

description of a positive Covid-19 test during the clinical event leading to the subject’s death."

Does this mean that half of the deaths reported to VAERS had C19 infections - meaning that they might not have died from the injection?

i am thinking big pharma will also want the data adjusted for background deaths and will place the data in the context of "deaths per million doses".

also, is denis rancourt's work referenced here something you are involved with/know about?

https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/did-the-roll-out-of-approximately 350 million doses in India between April-July 2021 cause 3.7 million deaths?

lastly, i am thinking that there is different lethality/harms per manufacturer and dose. astra zeneca has been withdrawn (by stealth!!) because TPTB looked at data like this https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/eudra-shows-4-5-times-more-deaths and adverse events reported per million doses for viral vector C19 "vaccines" compared to mRNA C19 "vaccines" - media silence continues

Ladapo's report in Fla, showed no state wide excess mortality - but high risk in young males. which means that other ages/genders must have had lower excess mortality - i think it was older women particularly.

Anyway, usual great work!

Onwards!

Expand full comment

Just looking at the file size, once you open the HHS link, already tells you there is big problem as of 2021 ( not 2020!), less so in 2022 (artful dodging of data?).

Expand full comment

V EU smo blokirani z nekimi dodatki, kjer hočejo vse osebne podatke

Expand full comment